Limited Enforcement Possibilities Under European Anti-Discrimination Legislation – A Case Study Of Procedural Novelties: Actio Popularis Action In Hungary

Adopted in 2000, the Racial Equality Directive is a new-age human rights instrument whose enforcement mechanism is directly rooted in the national sphere through equality bodies and judicial oversight culminating in preliminary referrals to the European Court of Justice. It is supported by procedural tools that member states were either obliged to introduce in their domestic legal regimes or opted to provide themselves, such as actio popularis standing of nongovernmental organisations. In the context of the changing political realities at the European level and the shortcomings of the individual justice model under the European Convention on Human Rights, this article looks at the procedural and substantive legal implications of actio popularis claims from four angles: (i) to establish what the added value of actio popularis standing may be in the context of effective protection against discrimination; (ii) to investigate what consequences actio popularis could have in relation to remedies; (iii) to demonstrate that actio popularis is especially important in relation to remedying structural discrimination, first and foremost in public education; and (iv) to analyse how actio popularis in public education operates in Hungary. It seeks to demonstrate through Hungarian case law that actio popularis claims are capable of addressing structural discrimination in civil law and that they are able to secure structural remedies. It argues that actio popularis standing also has implications for sanctions, ultimately determining the speed of European integration in public education.